Organizational adaption to changes in public objectives for management of Cache La Poudre River system

Research Period: 1965-1969.June 30, 1969.Submitted to Office of Water Resources Research, U.S. Department of Interior.Project A-005-COLO, Grant agreement no. 14-01-0001-1625

Dietary Intervention in Pregnant Women with Gestational Diabetes; Protocol for the DiGest Randomised Controlled Trial.

Funder: Wellcome TrustGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) annually affects 35,000 pregnancies in the United Kingdom, causing suboptimal health outcomes to the mother and child. Obesity and excessive gestational weight gain are risk factors for GDM. The Institute of Medicine recommends weight targets for women that are overweight and obese, however, there are no clear guidelines for women with GDM. Observational data suggest that modest weight loss (0.6-2 kg) after 28 weeks may reduce risk of caesarean section, large-for-gestational-age (LGA), and maternal postnatal glycaemia. This protocol for a multicentre randomised double-blind controlled trial aims to identify if a fully controlled reduced energy diet in GDM pregnancy improves infant birthweight and reduces maternal weight gain (primary outcomes). A total of 500 women with GDM (National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2015 criteria) and body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m2 will be randomised to receive a standard (2000 kcal/day) or reduced energy (1200 kcal/day) diet box containing all meals and snacks from 28 weeks to delivery. Women and caregivers will be blinded to the allocations. Food diaries, continuous glucose monitoring, and anthropometry will measure dietary compliance, glucose levels, and weight changes. Women will receive standard antenatal GDM management (insulin/metformin) according to NICE guidelines. The secondary endpoints include caesarean section rates, LGA, and maternal postnatal glucose concentrations

Erratum: Dietary Intervention in Pregnant Women with Gestational Diabetes; Protocol for the DiGest Randomised Controlled Trial; Nutrients 2020, 12, 1165.

The authors would like to correct an error in a recent published paper [...]

Are women positive for the One Step but negative for the Two Step screening tests for gestational diabetes at higher risk for adverse outcomes?

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate if women meeting criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) by the One Step test as per International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria but not by other less strict criteria have adverse pregnancy outcomes compared with GDM-negative controls. The primary outcome was the incidence of macrosomia, defined as birthweight > 4000 g. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from their inception until May 2017. All studies identifying pregnant women negative at the Two Step test, but positive at the One Step test for IADPSG criteria were included. We excluded studies that randomized women to the One Step vs. the Two Step tests; studies that compared different criteria within the same screening method; randomized studies comparing treatments for GDM; and studies comparing incidence of GDM in women doing the One Step test vs. the Two Step test. RESULTS: Eight retrospective cohort studies, including 29 983 women, were included. Five study groups and four control groups were identified. The heterogeneity between the studies was high. Gestational hypertension, preeclampsia and large for gestational age, as well as in some analyses cesarean delivery, macrosomia and preterm birth, were significantly more frequent, and small for gestational age in some analyses significantly less frequent, in women GDM-positive by the One Step, but not the Two Step. CONCLUSION: Women meeting criteria for GDM by IADPSG criteria but not by other less strict criteria have an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes such as gestational hypertension, preeclampsia and large for gestational age, compared with GDM-negative controls. Based on these findings, and evidence from other studies that treatment decreases these adverse outcomes, we suggest screening for GDM using the One Step IADPSG criteria

p53 Target Gene SMAR1 Is Dysregulated in Breast Cancer: Its Role in Cancer Cell Migration and Invasion

Tumor suppressor SMAR1 interacts and stabilizes p53 through phosphorylation at its serine-15 residue. We show that SMAR1 transcription is regulated by p53 through its response element present in the SMAR1 promoter. Upon Doxorubicin induced DNA damage, acetylated p53 is recruited on SMAR1 promoter that allows activation of its transcription. Once SMAR1 is induced, cell cycle arrest is observed that is correlated to increased phospho-ser-15-p53 and decreased p53 acetylation. Further we demonstrate that SMAR1 expression is drastically reduced during advancement of human breast cancer. This was correlated with defective p53 expression in breast cancer where acetylated p53 is sequestered into the heterochromatin region and become inaccessible to activate SMAR1 promoter. In a recent report we have shown that SMAR1 represses Cyclin D1 transcription through recruitment of HDAC1 dependent repressor complex at the MAR site of Cyclin D1 promoter. Here we show that downmodulation of SMAR1 in high grade breast carcinoma is correlated with upregulated Cyclin D1 expression. We also established that SMAR1 inhibits tumor cell migration and metastases through inhibition of TGFβ signaling and its downstream target genes including cutl1 and various focal adhesion molecules. Thus, we report that SMAR1 plays a central role in coordinating p53 and TGFβ pathways in human breast cancer

Impact of primary kidney disease on the effects of empagliflozin in patients with chronic kidney disease: secondary analyses of the EMPA-KIDNEY trial

Background: The EMPA KIDNEY trial showed that empagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary composite outcome of kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death in patients with chronic kidney disease mainly through slowing progression. We aimed to assess how effects of empagliflozin might differ by primary kidney disease across its broad population. Methods: EMPA-KIDNEY, a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, was conducted at 241 centres in eight countries (Canada, China, Germany, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, the UK, and the USA). Patients were eligible if their estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 20 to less than 45 mL/min per 1·73 m2, or 45 to less than 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) of 200 mg/g or higher at screening. They were randomly assigned (1:1) to 10 mg oral empagliflozin once daily or matching placebo. Effects on kidney disease progression (defined as a sustained ≥40% eGFR decline from randomisation, end-stage kidney disease, a sustained eGFR below 10 mL/min per 1·73 m2, or death from kidney failure) were assessed using prespecified Cox models, and eGFR slope analyses used shared parameter models. Subgroup comparisons were performed by including relevant interaction terms in models. EMPA-KIDNEY is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03594110. Findings: Between May 15, 2019, and April 16, 2021, 6609 participants were randomly assigned and followed up for a median of 2·0 years (IQR 1·5–2·4). Prespecified subgroupings by primary kidney disease included 2057 (31·1%) participants with diabetic kidney disease, 1669 (25·3%) with glomerular disease, 1445 (21·9%) with hypertensive or renovascular disease, and 1438 (21·8%) with other or unknown causes. Kidney disease progression occurred in 384 (11·6%) of 3304 patients in the empagliflozin group and 504 (15·2%) of 3305 patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·71 [95% CI 0·62–0·81]), with no evidence that the relative effect size varied significantly by primary kidney disease (pheterogeneity=0·62). The between-group difference in chronic eGFR slopes (ie, from 2 months to final follow-up) was 1·37 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (95% CI 1·16–1·59), representing a 50% (42–58) reduction in the rate of chronic eGFR decline. This relative effect of empagliflozin on chronic eGFR slope was similar in analyses by different primary kidney diseases, including in explorations by type of glomerular disease and diabetes (p values for heterogeneity all >0·1). Interpretation: In a broad range of patients with chronic kidney disease at risk of progression, including a wide range of non-diabetic causes of chronic kidney disease, empagliflozin reduced risk of kidney disease progression. Relative effect sizes were broadly similar irrespective of the cause of primary kidney disease, suggesting that SGLT2 inhibitors should be part of a standard of care to minimise risk of kidney failure in chronic kidney disease. Funding: Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and UK Medical Research Council

Sustainable Entrepreneurship: The Role of Perceived Barriers and Risk

FdR – Publicaties niet-programma gebonde

Analysis of a 100-ft. concrete arch

Thesis (B.S.)--University of Illinois, 1905.Typescript.Includes bibliographical references